By Brian Keane

President, SmartPower

The Bush Administration and, yes, the Obama Administration, have both acknowledged that coal will continue to be a vital and valuable piece of our energy portfolio. After all, our nation is sitting on 500 years worth of coal – we’re not likely to just ignore it.

But at the same time, the President is focused on diversifying our nation’s energy portfolio. This isn’t designed to kill coal, but rather to increase the production of other types of energy. The strategy is not simply to replace one type of energy for another. At the rate Americans use energy, the reality is that we simply need more energy to power our lives, our communities and our nation.

By Hal Quinn

President, National Mining Association

What’s Really Causing Coal’s Decline?

Let’s start by correcting the premise. The simplest answer to the question posed by The National Journal this week is “hyperbole” is behind the talk of coal’s “decline”. Like Mark Twain’s quip about his own demise, the news of coal’s decline is greatly exaggerated. It is, nonetheless, the cause for legitimate concern among those who value affordable electricity from a secure and abundant domestic energy source. So, let’s look at the question from a more dispassionate perspective.

First of all, the “decline-of-coal” that is now the subject of inside-the-Beltway chatter is very relative. From generating virtually half the nation’s electricity for a decade, coal is now generating 40 percent-plus. And with a 260-year supply of domestic coal under our feet, Americans will be relying on coal for the foreseeable future. That’s why the EIA’s most recent Outlook projects renewed growth in 2013.

By William O'Keefe

CEO, George C. Marshall Institute

Are EPA rules the reason the coal industry is declining? Or is natural gas and other market forces the cause? The very short answer is YES!

EPA’s new clean air rules are likely to become a course in the Law of Unintended Consequences. Although for this Administration and EPA, the unintended consequences will be the intended outcome. There is no subtlety to the Administration’s hostility to fossil energy. EPA has been carrying out the President’s objective with zest and vigor.

By John E. Sununu

Miner Allen Turner sits on his porch with his four children in Cawood, Ky. (ASSOCIATED PRESS/FILE 2006)

WHO SAYS President Obama doesn’t have an energy policy? Last month it was boldly on display as the Environmental Protection Agency published rules restricting CO2 emissions for power plants. Coupled with dramatic limits on mercury emissions issued in December, the new rules will fundamentally reshape power generation in America. Aside from the 15 plants already under construction, there will probably never be another coal-fired electric plant built in the United States.

Here in West Virginia and Ohio, we are well aware of the importance to our economies of coal and electricity from coal-fired power plants. And many area residents understand full well that if President Obama's administration is allowed to proceed with its war against coal, our monthly utility bills will skyrocket.

Clearly, that is not the situation everywhere, as Sen. Joe Manchin is coming to understand.

Manchin and a few other coal-state senators have been waging a lonely battle against the White House and its Environmental Protection Agency. This week, Manchin vowed once again to keep up the good fight.